Society: The rise of the 'technium' - Nature

Distinct from individual innovations such as radar or plastic polymer, the technium includes all the machines, processes, society, ... Skiptomaincontent Thankyouforvisitingnature.com.YouareusingabrowserversionwithlimitedsupportforCSS.Toobtain thebestexperience,werecommendyouuseamoreuptodatebrowser(orturnoffcompatibilitymodein InternetExplorer).Inthemeantime,toensurecontinuedsupport,wearedisplayingthesitewithoutstyles andJavaScript. Advertisement nature books&arts article Society:Theriseofthe'technium' DownloadPDF DownloadPDF Subjects PhilosophySocietyTechnology KevinKellyarguescompellinglythattechnologyistakingonalifeofitsown,findsZaheerBaber. WhatTechnologyWantsKevinKellyViking:2010.416pp.$27.959780670022151|ISBN:978-0-6700-2215-1 InWhatTechnologyWants,writerKevinKellyradicallyrethinkstherelationshipbetweenhumansandtechnology.Scientificinventionshavebecomesocomplexandinterwovenwithourlives,hesays,thathumanshavelessandlessswayoverhowmechanicalsystemsevolve.Norcanwestopthespreadoftechnologies.Consequently,whenassessingfuturerisks,weshouldadoptaproactiveapproachoftrialanderrorandrevision,ratherthanstrictprecaution.Tomakehispoint,Kellyintroducestheconceptofthe'technium'toembodythevasttechno-socialsystem.Distinctfromindividualinnovationssuchasradarorplasticpolymer,thetechniumincludesallthemachines,processes,society,cultureandphilosophiesassociatedwithtechnologies.Thesheercomplexityofinteractionsbetweenthevariouslayersandloopsofthetechniumgivesitadegreeofautonomy.Asitevolves,itdevelopsitsowndynamics.Technologiessuchasthisdronearebecomingincreasinglyindependentofhumans. Credit:NASA/S.SMITHAccordingtoKelly,anautonomoussystemdisplaystraitsofself-repair,self-defence,self-maintenance,self-controlandself-improvement.Nocurrentsystemhasalltheseproperties,headmits,butmanytechnologiesexhibitsomeofthem.Aeroplanedronescanself-steerandstayaloftforhours,forinstance,butcannotrepairthemselves.Communicationnetworkscanrepairthemselvesbutcannotself-reproduce.Computervirusescanself-reproducebutcannotimprovethemselves.Astechnologiesmultiplyandbecomemoreadaptive,thetechniumisbecomingincreasinglyautonomous.Forexample,thevastglobalcommunicationsnetworkincorporates170quadrillioncomputerchips(aquadrillionis1015)wiredupintoonegiantcomputingplatform,withadensityoflinksapproachingthatofsynapsesinthehumanbrain.Scientistscantracethemajorityoftrafficflowingthroughthenetworks,butoccasionalbitsarelostortransformedduringtransmission.Mostofthesemutationsofinformationareattributabletocausessuchashackingandmachineerror,butafewpercentarenot—thesechangesoriginatenotfromhumans,butfromvagariesinthesystemitself.Theflowofbitsthroughthetelephonenetworkhas,inthepastdecade,becomestatisticallysimilartothefractalpatternfoundinself-organizedsystems.Thissuggeststhatitisdevelopingbehaviourofitsown.Althoughthetechniumhasneitheranideaofselfnorconsciousdesires,itdevelopsmechanicaltendencies,or'wants',throughitscomplexbehaviour.Itsmillionsofamplifyingrelationshipsandcircuitsofinfluencepushthetechniumincertaindirections.Forexample,somepersonalrobotscannavigateobstaclestoseekoutpoweroutletsandplugthemselvesintoberecharged.ForKelly,theserobotsarelikebacteriadriftingtowardsnutrientswithnoconsciousawarenessofthatgoal.Asfrontiertechnologiesincreaseinsophistication,these'wants'gaininbothcomplexityandforce.Moreover,thetendenciesbecomeincreasinglyindependentofhumandesignersandusers.AsKellypointsout,technophobesandtechnophilesalikeagreethatthetechniumisspinningbeyondhumancontrol.Theydisagreeonlyonwhatshouldbedoneaboutit:whetherthetechniumshouldbestopped,modifiedorembraced.Kellyrespectsallsidesinthepolarizeddebatesabouttechnology.Heacceptstheuneasethatthetechniumcanunleash,devotingchapterstotheanti-technologymanifestooftheUnabomber,TedKaczynski,andtheselectiveuptakeofinnovationsbyAmishpeople.Herecognizesthosewhohavepositionsinbetween,includingtheproponentsofindigenousknowledgeandinventorsthemselves.Everytechnologyproducesdegreesofgood,harmandrisk,andtheevolutionofeachisuncertain.Apprehensionaboutthetechniumassumingalifeofitsowncontinuestogrowwiththeriseofgenomics,robotics,informaticsandnanotechnology.Cautiousstatesandpublicsoftenturntotheprecautionaryprinciple,whichholdsthatanytechnologymustbeshowntodonoharmbeforeitcanbeembraced.Kellyarguesthatthisapproachisimpractical,unfeasibleandunattainable.Everytechnologyproducesdegreesofgood,harmandrisk,andtheevolutionofeachisuncertain—nonecaneverbesaidtobedecisivelysafe.Asanalternative,KellydrawsonphilosopherMaxMore's'proactionaryprinciple',whichstatesthattheonlywaytoevaluatenewtechnologiesistotrythemoutasprototypesandthenrefinethem.Toevaluateriskwemustcontinuallyassessnewtechnologiesinthecontextofuse.KellyparesMore'sprincipledowntofiveelements:anticipation;continualassessment;prioritizationofrisks;rapidcorrectionofharm;andredirection.Owingtotheautonomyofthetechnium,Kellycontends,itispointlesstobanriskytechnologies.Attemptstoputamoratoriumonthemwillonlyensurethattheemergentoneswillbeevenmoreimpervioustohumancontrol—exhibitingaformofnaturalselection.Instead,weshouldstrivetoproducetechnologythatis'moreconvivial'—thatis,morecompatiblewithlife.Kellybelievesthateverytechnologycanbechannelledtowardsusesthatpromotegreatertransparencyandmorecollaboration,flexibilityandopennessacrosssociety.Hedrawsextensivelyonotherstudies,particularlyLangdonWinner'sgroundbreakingbookAutonomousTechnology(MITPress,1977).Winnerfamouslydiscusseduncontrollable“technologicaldrift”asoneofthemostdisturbingfeaturesofmodernlife.Healsoextensivelyusedthephrase'socio-technicalsystem'ratherthan'socialsystem'tocapturetheseamlessamalgamationofhumansandtechnology.ButKelly'sconceptofthetechniumandhisdescriptionofhowitattainsautonomyareoriginalandtimely. AuthorinformationAuthornoteszaheer.baber@gmail.comAuthorsandAffiliationsZaheerBaberisprofessorofsociologyattheUniversityofToronto,Ontario,M5S1A1,Canada,andauthorofCyberAsia.email:[email protected], ZaheerBaberAuthorsZaheerBaberViewauthorpublicationsYoucanalsosearchforthisauthorin PubMed GoogleScholarRightsandpermissionsReprintsandPermissionsAboutthisarticleCitethisarticleBaber,Z.Society:Theriseofthe'technium'. Nature468,372–373(2010).https://doi.org/10.1038/468372aDownloadcitationPublished:17November2010IssueDate:18November2010DOI:https://doi.org/10.1038/468372aSharethisarticleAnyoneyousharethefollowinglinkwithwillbeabletoreadthiscontent:GetshareablelinkSorry,ashareablelinkisnotcurrentlyavailableforthisarticle.Copytoclipboard ProvidedbytheSpringerNatureSharedItcontent-sharinginitiative Furtherreading Newinpaperback Nature(2011) DownloadPDF Advertisement Explorecontent Researcharticles News Opinion ResearchAnalysis Careers Books&Culture Podcasts Videos Currentissue Browseissues Collections Subjects FollowusonFacebook FollowusonTwitter Signupforalerts RSSfeed Aboutthejournal JournalStaff AbouttheEditors JournalInformation Ourpublishingmodels EditorialValuesStatement JournalMetrics Awards Contact Editorialpolicies HistoryofNature Sendanewstip Publishwithus ForAuthors ForReferees Submitmanuscript Search Searcharticlesbysubject,keywordorauthor Showresultsfrom Alljournals Thisjournal Search Advancedsearch Quicklinks Explorearticlesbysubject Findajob Guidetoauthors Editorialpolicies Closebanner Close SignupfortheNatureBriefingnewsletter—whatmattersinscience,freetoyourinboxdaily. Emailaddress Signup IagreemyinformationwillbeprocessedinaccordancewiththeNatureandSpringerNatureLimitedPrivacyPolicy. Closebanner Close Getthemostimportantsciencestoriesoftheday,freeinyourinbox. SignupforNatureBriefing